The section on the development of the freedom of speech outlined the process whereby people became protected in their abilities to speak freely an openly about most matters, especially those involving the operations of the government. The concept of sedition as a practical matter was narrowed considerably. But there are areas where people can still be punished for saying certain things. As with all other aspects of the Constitution - especially as it pertains to rights and liberties - the freedom of speech is balanced against the greater interests of society. The previous set of slides mentioned Oliver Wendell Holmes' "falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater" as an example of an act of speech that would not be protected by the First Amendment.
This logic has been applied to large range of similar instances which have forced the Supreme Court - mostly over the past century - to determine the limits of the freedom of speech. This set of slides walk through a handful of cases where these decisions have been made. As with much of the language of the Constitution, the word "speech" is subject to interpretation. In a previous section we discussed how the court began defining campaign finance as speech beginning in the 1970s. When you're finished with them, you should have a reasonable understanding of what the freedom of speech means in practice, what speech is and is not constitutionally protected, and why.
Goals
After reading through the material above, you should be able to address the following:
- The various approaches members of the Supreme Court take in determining what "free speech" means.
- What the Supreme Court has and has not ruled is protected speech.
- Why the Supreme Court - Justice Brandeis anyway - believed free speech was essential in a democracy.
- The rationale used by the court to determine what types of speech create a clear and present danger, and which do not. - The rationale behind what can limit speech
- The specific types of speech that can be limited
Supreme Court Cases
Understand the rulings in the following court cases:
- Whitney v California - Brandenburg v Ohio - Chaplinsky v New Hampshire - Cohen v California - Texas v. Johnson - Virginia v. Black - Minersville School District v. Gobitis - Morse v. Frederick - Miller v. California - Reno v. ACLU - Ashcroft v. ACLU - Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition - Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District - FCC v. Pacifica Foundation - FCC v. Fox
Key Terms
- free speech
- sedition
- imminent danger
- clear and present danger
- bad tendency rule
- imminent lawless action
- fighting words
- the heckler's veto / self censorship
- hate speech / speech codes
- the chilling effect doctrine
- false speech
- the public forum doctrine
- symbolic speech
- compelled speech
- school speech
- obscenity
- The Miller Test
- pandering
- profanity
- fleeting expletives
- commercial speech
- political speech
- strict scrutiny
Description
The section on the development of the freedom of speech outlined the process whereby people became protected in their abilities to speak freely an openly about most matters, especially those involving the operations of the government. The concept of sedition as a practical matter was narrowed considerably. But there are areas where people can still be punished for saying certain things. As with all other aspects of the Constitution - especially as it pertains to rights and liberties - the freedom of speech is balanced against the greater interests of society. The previous set of slides mentioned Oliver Wendell Holmes' "falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater" as an example of an act of speech that would not be protected by the First Amendment.
This logic has been applied to large range of similar instances which have forced the Supreme Court - mostly over the past century - to determine the limits of the freedom of speech. This set of slides walk through a handful of cases where these decisions have been made. As with much of the language of the Constitution, the word "speech" is subject to interpretation. In a previous section we discussed how the court began defining campaign finance as speech beginning in the 1970s. When you're finished with them, you should have a reasonable understanding of what the freedom of speech means in practice, what speech is and is not constitutionally protected, and why.
Goals
After reading through the material above, you should be able to address the following:
- The various approaches members of the Supreme Court take in determining what "free speech" means.
- What the Supreme Court has and has not ruled is protected speech.
- Why the Supreme Court - Justice Brandeis anyway - believed free speech was essential in a democracy.
- The rationale used by the court to determine what types of speech create a clear and present danger, and which do not.
- The rationale behind what can limit speech
- The specific types of speech that can be limited
Supreme Court Cases
Understand the rulings in the following court cases:
- Whitney v California
- Brandenburg v Ohio
- Chaplinsky v New Hampshire
- Cohen v California
- Texas v. Johnson
- Virginia v. Black
- Minersville School District v. Gobitis
- Morse v. Frederick
- Miller v. California
- Reno v. ACLU
- Ashcroft v. ACLU
- Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition
- Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
- FCC v. Pacifica Foundation
- FCC v. Fox
Key Terms
- free speech
- sedition
- imminent danger
- clear and present danger
- bad tendency rule
- imminent lawless action
- fighting words
- the heckler's veto / self censorship
- hate speech / speech codes
- the chilling effect doctrine
- false speech
- the public forum doctrine
- symbolic speech
- compelled speech
- school speech
- obscenity
- The Miller Test
- pandering
- profanity
- fleeting expletives
- commercial speech
- political speech
- strict scrutiny